News
Judge Blocks The Onion's Bid to Take Over Alex Jones' Infowars
A Texas bankruptcy court ruled on Tuesday that The Onion‘s acquisition of Alex Jones‘ disinformation empire, Infowars, could not move forward, dealing a blow to the satirical newspaper. The most surreal media merger in recent memory is now set to disintegrate — at least for now — after almost a month of legal wrangling.
“I don’t think it’s enough money,” U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Christopher Lopez wrote in a late-night decision, per NBC News. “I’m going to not approve the sale.” Judge Lopez has left it up to trustee Christopher Murray to decide what to do next. It’s possible that there could be another auction, in which the Onion could once again place bid for the embattled conspiracy theorist’s publication. He could also decide to reexamine the Jones-associated company First United American, which offered a revised bid that has not yet been disclosed, per the AP.
In 2022, Jones was ordered to pay a total of nearly $1.5 billion in civil damages to the families of victims in the deadly 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newton, Connecticut. Jones had falsely and repeatedly claimed on Infowars that the massacre was a hoax, smearing parents of children who were killed as “crisis actors” — incendiary attacks that saw the grieving families subjected to years of harassment and intimidation by viewers who believed Jones’ lies. In the course of multiple defamation lawsuits brought against him and Infowars’ parent company, Free Speech Systems, Jones testified that, contrary to his earlier statements, the Sandy Hook shooting was “100 percent real.”
This year, having failed to pay what he owed the victims’ families, Jones asked a judge to convert his personal bankruptcy to a Chapter 7 to liquidate his assets, including the Infowars brand, in order to at least partially cover the massive settlement. The court ruled in September that he could put Free Speech Systems up for auction.
The process took a surprising turn in November, when The Onion revealed that it had placed the winning bid in the court-ordered auction. It was another attention-grabbing stunt for the beloved parody publisher, which had just three months earlier revived its print edition under new parent company Global Tetrahedron, a firm with a jokingly ominous name created to acquire the title from its previous owner in April, with former NBC News reporter Ben Collins stepping in as CEO of the paper. The Onion announced that it would relaunch Infowars and its social channels in January 2025 as sources of irreverent comedy rather than paranoiac diatribes, vowing “to end Infowars’ relentless barrage of disinformation for the sake of selling supplements and replace it with The Onion’s relentless barrage of humor for good.” The brand also partnered with the gun control activism nonprofit Everytown for Gun Safety on an ad deal for the revamped Infowars.
Jones was apoplectic over the sale and aired a broadcast that saw him raving that “imperial troops” were storming his studio to seize it from him. That didn’t happen, and a company with links to the right-wing firebrand soon mounted a legal challenge to the takeover: First American United Companies, affiliated with Jones’ dietary supplements business, alleged that The Onion had bid only $1.75 million for Infowars, compared to its offer of $3.5 million, and had therefore won the auction through collusion and fraud. Murray, the bankruptcy trustee overseeing the liquidation of Free Speech Systems, said the First American bid was actually “inferior,” as the total value of The Onion‘s deal stood at $7 million — because most of the Sandy Hook families had agreed to receive a percentage of revenues from an Onion-owned Infowars instead of cash from the sale itself. (These were the only two sealed bids in the auction.)
Meanwhile, Elon Musk — who a year ago made the controversial decision to reinstate Jones’ account on X, formerly Twitter, despite his permanent suspensions from nearly every other social media platform — also took action against the purchase. In legal objection to the sale filed by X in November, the company pointed out that according to its user agreement, they are the owner of Jones’ and Infowars’ accounts on the site, and have no obligation to turn them over to an entity that purchases Free Speech Systems’ collective assets. The unusually aggressive move was a stark reminder that users of such websites do not have ultimate control of their profiles, and threw a potential wrench in The Onion‘s scheme to turn Jones’ digital footprint into a mockery of everything he stands for.
Murray testified on Tuesday before Judge Lopez of the U.S. District and Bankruptcy Court of the Southern District of Texas that The Onion‘s offer should be approved over First American’s. In his own testimony, auctioneer Jeff Tanenbaum defended the sale process when Jones’ lawyers pressed him over not holding a live auction.
Jones himself did not attend court this week but used his show to continue complaining about the prospect of The Onion wresting control of his once lucrative conspiracy theory factory. “I can’t imagine the judge would certify this fraud,” he told his audience on Tuesday. “I mean it’s head-spinning the stuff they did and what they claimed.”
Now that the judge has spoken, it’s up to Christopher Murray to decide what happens next — and whether the cathartic punchline of the Sandy Hook families having some say over Infowars’ fate could finally come to pass.
News
Supreme Court blocks redrawing of New York congressional map, dealing a win for GOP
The Supreme Court
Win McNamee/Getty Images
hide caption
toggle caption
Win McNamee/Getty Images
The Supreme Court on Monday intervened in New York’s redistricting process, blocking a lower court decision that would likely have flipped a Republican congressional district into a Democratic district.
At issue is the midterm redrawing of New York’s 11th congressional district, including Staten Island and a small part of Brooklyn. The district is currently held by a Republican, but on Jan. 21, a state Supreme Court judge ruled that the current district dilutes the power of Black and Latino voters in violation of the state constitution.
GOP Rep. Nicole Malliotakis, who represents the district, and the Republican co-chair of the state Board of Elections promptly appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, asking the justices to block the redrawing as an unconstitutional “racial gerrymander.” New York’s congressional election cycle was set to officially begin Feb. 24, the opening day for candidates to seek placement on the ballot.
As in this year’s prior mid-decade redistricting fights — in Texas and California — the Trump administration backed the Republicans.
Voters and the State of New York contended it’s too soon for the Supreme Court to wade into this dispute. New York’s highest state court has not issued a final judgment, so the voters asserted that if the Supreme Court grants relief now “future stay applicants will see little purpose in waiting for state court rulings before coming to this Court” and “be rewarded for such gamesmanship.” The state argues this is an issue for “New York courts, not federal courts” to resolve, and there is sufficient time for the dispute to be resolved on the merits.
The court majority explained the decision to intervene in 101 words, which the three dissenting liberal justices summarized as “Rules for thee, but not for me.”
The unsigned majority order does not explain the Court’s rationale. It says only how long the stay will last, until the case moves through the New York State appeals courts. If, however, the losing party petitions and the court agrees to hear the challenge, the stay extends until the final opinion is announced.
Dissenting from the decision were Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. Writing for the three, Sotomayor said that if nonfinal decisions of a state trial court can be brought to highest court, “then every decision from any court is now fair game.” More immediately, she noted, “By granting these applications, the Court thrusts itself into the middle of every election-law dispute around the country, even as many States redraw their congressional maps ahead of the 2026 election.”
Monday’s Supreme Court action deviates from the court’s hands-off pattern in these mid-term redistricting fights this year. In two previous cases — from Texas and California — the court refused to intervene, allowing newly drawn maps to stay in effect.
Requests for Supreme Court intervention on redistricting issues has been a recurring theme this term, a trend that is likely to grow. Earlier last month the high court allowed California to use a voter-approved, Democratic-friendly map. California’s redistricting came in response to a GOP-friendly redistricting plan in Texas that the Supreme Court also permitted to move forward. These redistricting efforts are expected to offset one another.
But the high court itself has yet to rule on a challenge to Louisiana’s voting map, which was drawn by the state legislature after the decennial census in order to create a second majority-Black district. Since the drawing of that second majority-black district, the state has backed away from that map, hoping to return to a plan that provides for only one majority-minority district.
The Supreme Court’s consideration of the Louisiana case has stretched across two terms. The justices failed to resolve the case last term and chose to order a second round of arguments this term adding a new question: Does the state’s intentional creation of a second majority-minority district violate the constitution’s Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments’ guarantee of the right to vote and the authority of Congress to enforce that mandate?
Following the addition of the new question, the state of Louisiana flipped positions to oppose the map it had just drawn and defended in court. Whether the Supreme Court follows suit remains to be seen. But the tone of the October argument suggested that the court’s conservative supermajority is likely to continue undercutting the 1965 Voting Rights Act.
News
Map: Earthquake Shakes Central California
Note: Map shows the area with a shake intensity of 3 or greater, which U.S.G.S. defines as “weak,” though the earthquake may be felt outside the areas shown. The New York Times
A minor earthquake with a preliminary magnitude of 3.5 struck in Central California on Monday, according to the United States Geological Survey.
The temblor happened at 7:17 a.m. Pacific time about 6 miles northwest of Pinnacles, Calif., data from the agency shows.
As seismologists review available data, they may revise the earthquake’s reported magnitude. Additional information collected about the earthquake may also prompt U.S.G.S. scientists to update the shake-severity map.
Source: United States Geological Survey | Notes: Shaking categories are based on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale. When aftershock data is available, the corresponding maps and charts include earthquakes within 100 miles and seven days of the initial quake. All times above are Pacific time. Shake data is as of Monday, March 2 at 10:20 a.m. Eastern. Aftershocks data is as of Monday, March 2 at 11:18 a.m. Eastern.
News
US says Kuwait accidentally shot down 3 American jets
The U.S. and Israel have been conducting strikes against targets in Iran since Saturday morning, with the aim of toppling Tehran’s clerical regime. Iran has fired back, with retaliatory assaults featuring missiles and drones targeting several Gulf countries and American bases in the Middle East.
“All six aircrew ejected safely, have been safely recovered, and are in stable condition. Kuwait has acknowledged this incident, and we are grateful for the efforts of the Kuwaiti defense forces and their support in this ongoing operation,” Central Command said.
“The cause of the incident is under investigation. Additional information will be released as it becomes available,” it added.
In a separate statement later Monday, Central Command said that American forces had been killed during combat since the strikes began.
“As of 7:30 am ET, March 2, four U.S. service members have been killed in action. The fourth service member, who was seriously wounded during Iran’s initial attacks, eventually succumbed to their injuries,” it said.
Major combat operations continue and our response effort is ongoing. The identities of the fallen are being withheld until 24 hours after next of kin notification,” Central Command added.
This story has been updated.
-
World5 days agoExclusive: DeepSeek withholds latest AI model from US chipmakers including Nvidia, sources say
-
Massachusetts5 days agoMother and daughter injured in Taunton house explosion
-
Denver, CO5 days ago10 acres charred, 5 injured in Thornton grass fire, evacuation orders lifted
-
Louisiana1 week agoWildfire near Gum Swamp Road in Livingston Parish now under control; more than 200 acres burned
-
Technology1 week agoYouTube TV billing scam emails are hitting inboxes
-
Politics1 week agoOpenAI didn’t contact police despite employees flagging mass shooter’s concerning chatbot interactions: REPORT
-
Technology1 week agoStellantis is in a crisis of its own making
-
News1 week agoWorld reacts as US top court limits Trump’s tariff powers